Why Are Tax Brackets Adjusted for Inflation but Not Deductions Like Mortgage Interest? Seems Unfair

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see the childcare FSA amount increased. It’s been 5k since forever, which I’ve already spent and then some by February. The amount was 5k back in 1986 when I was in diapers myself, so talk about not even remotely keeping up with inflation. 5k in 1986 is over 14k today. Seems like it would be reasonable to allow a ~15k tax free allotment.

I don't have kids in daycare anymore and one of my kids is aging out of the Dependent Care coverage this year, but I still 100% agree with you. $5000 is barely 2 months of daycare.

+1!

You can use the $5K for summer camps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been wondering about something that feels a bit unfair. Tax brackets and Social Security benefits get adjusted for inflation every year, which makes sense to keep up with the rising cost of living. But other important tax-related items, like the mortgage interest deduction limit and various credits or deductions, don’t seem to get the same treatment. Why is this the case? It seems like we’re penalized for inflation when it comes to these deductions, especially in high-cost areas where housing prices have skyrocketed. Does anyone have insight into why some things are adjusted while others are not? Is this something that could be changed in the future, or are we stuck with this imbalance?

Because that’s how Congress wrote the statutes. Tax deductions and credits are a form of government spending. There are some winners and losers every time. There’s nothing inherently fair or unfair about it.

+1

Next time, we're going to read posts like "how come someone who pays 0 in taxes gets snap benefits, when I pay $500,000 in taxes and I get nothing?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All tax write-offs for homes should be completely eliminated, including 1031s. Why is it anyone else's responsibility to subsidize your lifestyle and home? No tax breaks for homeowners in any way shape or form.

Alright then all tax write offs for rental properties should also be eliminated. Landlords don’t deserve special treatment either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've never understood why someone should should get to pay less federal income tax because they decided to take a mortgage.

I'm not a scholar on this but work in housing. I believe it's because it's beneficial for residents to own land. They are more likely to defend it and support it and the infrastructure around it. So, there is an incentive to taking on a mortgage rather than having a few people or the government own land or outside investors.

Uh sure it's not because the mortgage industry and realtors lobbied Congress to keep the deduction in place to benefit generally wealthier homeowners, when personal interest deductibility generally was removed from the Code in 1986.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All tax write-offs for homes should be completely eliminated, including 1031s. Why is it anyone else's responsibility to subsidize your lifestyle and home? No tax breaks for homeowners in any way shape or form.

Alright then all tax write offs for rental properties should also be eliminated. Landlords don’t deserve special treatment either.

Agreed!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've never understood why someone should should get to pay less federal income tax because they decided to take a mortgage.

I'm not a scholar on this but work in housing. I believe it's because it's beneficial for residents to own land. They are more likely to defend it and support it and the infrastructure around it. So, there is an incentive to taking on a mortgage rather than having a few people or the government own land or outside investors.

Uh sure it's not because the mortgage industry and realtors lobbied Congress to keep the deduction in place to benefit generally wealthier homeowners, when personal interest deductibility generally was removed from the Code in 1986.

For the full actual history, which has nothing to do with the myth of encouraging homeownership and thus "good stewards".

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/magazine/who-needs-the-mortgageinterest-deduction.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All tax write-offs for homes should be completely eliminated, including 1031s. Why is it anyone else's responsibility to subsidize your lifestyle and home? No tax breaks for homeowners in any way shape or form.

Alright then all tax write offs for rental properties should also be eliminated. Landlords don’t deserve special treatment either.

Changing the policies that incentivize small-scale landlords would open up a significant amount of housing:

Remove mortgage interest deduction for second properties (not a huge impact because most of these properties are locked in at 2-3%).

Limit tax write-offs for rental properties.

Eliminate the ability to rent out FHA-financed homes (these are usually “starter homes” that homeowners turn into rentals when they upgrade).

Increase limits for FSA (both medical and dependent care).

[Anonymous]

repeal the salt deduction! $10k is an absolute joke for anyone living near a reasonable sized city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because middle class people should not be subsidizing rich people with large mortgages.

Umm, the "rich people" who are not multi millionaires do not get any tax breaks. If your income is W2/interest you pay high taxes. Not much to deduct. I've paid more in state income taxes than most people will earn in their lifetime. we don't get deductions. I've more than paid our "fair share" for society. Only perk is LT cap gains are not taxed at 37% (for now). If anything I'm subsidizing 95-97% of society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All tax write-offs for homes should be completely eliminated, including 1031s. Why is it anyone else's responsibility to subsidize your lifestyle and home? No tax breaks for homeowners in any way shape or form.

The only group who would actually want this to happen are landlords and especially large landlords and the tax category of real estate professionals.

Homeowners and renters get screwed by this policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because middle class people should not be subsidizing rich people with large mortgages.

Umm, the "rich people" who are not multi millionaires do not get any tax breaks. If your income is W2/interest you pay high taxes. Not much to deduct. I've paid more in state income taxes than most people will earn in their lifetime. we don't get deductions. I've more than paid our "fair share" for society. Only perk is LT cap gains are not taxed at 37% (for now). If anything I'm subsidizing 95-97% of society.

My income and my spouse's income is all W2, and my household gets plenty of tax breaks. We deduct our charitable donations. We put almost $50,000 into tax-free investment accounts every year. We deduct thousands of dollars in state taxes and tens of thousands of dollars in mortgage interest. We save thousands of dollars every year for health care that's triple-tax-advantaged, so we don't even have to pay FICA taxes on it, nor will we pay taxes on it when we spend it eventually. We've stashed money away for our kids to go to college years from now; our contributions amount to less than half the value of the accounts, and we'll never pay taxes on the gains.

All of that amounts to other taxpayers subsidizing our costs.